Hello Herb.
Gorgeous ME262! detachable nacelles and scale gear! NICE!
Pricey boat motors though!
Figured you'd steer clear of those types..... and not because of the price!
Have you settled on 6S,9S or 12S?
Maybe I'm wrong but 6S seems low to me for the size of that jet.
Cheers!
Bruce

cool...
Estimate for AUW?
I maidened my new little F9F sunday and talked w/ Hung, He read something on rcg about the 262 weighing 20-25lbs but i think its closer to 13lbs. Even the turbine version lists at 15.5 maybe it was a different brand he saw...

20lbs on 1800watts...amazing! Must've needed a really long runway to rotate!LOL
White 8 is my fav looking thru the 1st site you linked.http://www.hsgalleries.com/gallery04...rofileba_2.htm
I really like the yellow on the nacelles and the stripe on the fuselage.
The red nose w/redtail top ones are nice as well.

Last edited by bmiller; May 01, 2011 at 12:32 AM.
Reason: deleted off topic comment

Well theres no accounting for taste!
Just kidding! "white 2" is very nice.
Definitely the gray versions, the green camos are better on FW-190s!
Maidened my 'glass habu32 today, impressive jet, you should've been there!

That is the gear I used on mine. I prefer air up and air down. 1st flew mine on a WeMoTec Midi fan using a Hacker B50-15L on 20 2400 ma NiCd cells then switch it over to 6S4P Thunder Power 8000ma (6C batteries) ME-262 flew great like it is on rails. I have built 5 of the over the years. Two for me and three for other people.
Bob

Well I ordered all the Robart air-up air-down gear from Robart and Tower, including scale wheels and Robostruts, and it should be here in a week or so

Robart 558RS 105 deg Pneumatic Nose Retract RoboStrut Ready

Robart 551RS 85 Degree Main Gear RoboStrut Ready (2x)

Robart 660 Straight RoboStruts 7/16" (2x)

Robart 662R Right Hand Robostrut 3 1/4"-3 1/2" Wheels

Robart 660DB Gear Door Mounting Bracket 7/16" Strut (2x)

Robart 157VR Variable Rate Air Control Kit

Robart 172 Small Pressure Tank

Robart 190 Air Line Quick Disconnects

Robart 117 Scale Wheels 3-3/4" (2)

Robart 1535 Scale Wheels 3-1/2" Diamond (2)

Robart 116 Scale Wheels 3-1/2" (2)

Robart 1544 Foam Wheel Inserts 3-3/4-4" (4x)

I did consider the E-Flites 60-120 at some point, but concluded for now that a) they are not strong enough and b) there's already reports of at least two crashes in large edf because of unreliable electronics/switches for the E-Flite 60-120 :

I have a kit minus the clear canopy up in the stack of unbuilt planes. I rehabbed another one for a club mate. We settled on a 6s setup and it has plenty of power and still clocks over 100mph. If you can mod in the flaps as it lands with a shallow slope and fast.

Nice ! Yes mine will definitely have flaps, have not decided yet whether it will have twin flaps (left and right of the nacelles) or single flaps (inboard of the nacelles only).

The power setup I have in mind will have performance comparable to the turbine setup , but with better reliability (at least that's the intent). It will be either 8S or 9S per fan, ca. 2400W per fan on full afterburner.

The reason for going with Robart wheels at this point is that the setup will allow for pneumatic brakes (either Robart or BVM), it seems recently all my edf jets have a hard time slowing down on asphalt ... on grass this has been much less of a problem.

The problem with pneumatic brakes is that they need relatively heavy machined aluminum hubs ... on top of the already heavy Robart struts. I have also looked into electric brakes and they are still heavy (and ugly).

The nacelles each contain a very solidly installed ring or short tube to accept the 90mm fan, it seems the original design was for a Moki 90mm fan, but similarly sized 90mm fans fit the nacelles perfectly.

The fan will have to be supported at the back with some ply formers which I am in the process of fabricating. A number of tricks will be needed to reduce that annoying loud edf vibration noise.

Also the nacelles need to be connected very rigidly to the wing otherwise there will be more vibration, more noise, and possibly a nacelle moving due to the fan & motor weight up front.

Took me two weeks just to figure out which Robart parts were the right ones (Thanks Chris !!) ... $500+ in landing gear struts wheels etc and I have not even started on the damn thing... Even Fritz above was shipped from the UK.

I hear ya on the price. It's why I have not started mine yet. I need to finish a couple other projects before plunking down the cash for all the gear. I'm watching your build with great interest though

Images

There are only very minimal instructions with this kit ("now glue in the front retract formers" ... ), which required that one very carefully measure and scale up the appropriate size of wheels and struts from a scale drawing of the Me-262.

The result of this exercise is the Robart struts I picked worked out perfect in length, whereas the nosegear is a tad longer.

Images

Congratulation! you will not be disappointed.
This bird flies so well.
Mine has 6.8kg flying weight. And I´m using the e-flite retracts with robart struts.
I had some troubles with the electronics before.
But i found out, that i did not program the point for gear up/gear down on
the doorsequencer in the correct way. Now it is working fine.
And the gear has now his own electric circuit, directly powered by a 2s 1000mAh pack. It is good for around 200 cycles.
My cg is at 140mm back from the point where the wing meets the fuse with
gear up.
I am using MOKI Impeller with WeMoTec MIDI Rotors on Mega 22/20/3
with 5s5200er each side. 4.1kg of thrust.
Due to the low wing loading, the plane takes off from grass easily.

Before installing the retracts, air valves etc they all need to be pressure tested.

I recently had some very bad experience from another manufacturer (not Robart and not Springair) where just about every junk component leaked :
two out of three retract units, retract valve, fill valve and all three door cylinders . Luckily I caught all those leaks during pressure testing, and
was able to fix all of the above one way or another, including re-soldering nipples and doubling the number of air tanks. Don't want to repeat that experience again !

So far all the Robart components have worked flawlessly, no leaks and holding pressure at 100 psi for at least 1/2 day

I actually will be using, eventually, a different brand of tubing, not the Robart translucent one (BVM). I am told the Robart one can pop off when it gets a bit hot in the summer.

But for pressure testing and leak detection this stuff seems fine.

.

Images

I got around connecting all the airlines to the main retract units, as well as to the two tee's - without developing metacarpal tunnel syndrome I hope I won't have to remove those airlines any time soon ...

On the original Me-262 the wheels wells were left bare aluminum (no zinc chromate type of paint) so I went the same way, at least for the visible part. It is nice to still be able to see some of the airex sandwich composite structure of the wing.

The airlines are passed through some suitably sized holes that provide some strain relief so the tubing does not yank through the wing.

Also, I routed the airlines at the back of the wing to avoid weakening the wing skins around the spar region ...

.

Images

Initially I though the Me-262 would have flaps; I then looked closely at the interior of the wing and it looks like cutting out flaps will require some major structural work on the wing : Cutting out the flaps by itself will weaken the wing significantly, right between the nacelles.

I decided therefore to just use the ailearons as drag devices (spoilerons, ailerons up a few mm for landing) and install pneumatic (air) brakes.

For the brakes I might go with the BVM/Robart ones (they look identical) or perhaps another offering I saw lately. The brakes have to fit a 3.75 or 4 inch wheel. I am looking also at an SMC brake valve, or the BVM Smooth Stop one.

I'm in the process of putting together an AW Me-262, and I made the inboard flaps operational. I added a 3/32nd plywood spar running along the inboard flap leading edge from the inboard edge of the outboard flap (which I cut off from the aileron) to the center of the wing. I capped the flap edges and adjoining wing openings with the same material. I filled in the wing trailing edges with PU glue just before I capped the opening. It seems plenty strong.

I'm using the Robart compact unibrakes. I thinking about using the Mini Hobby
Real Proportional Air-Brake valve with a separate air tank.

Herb,
I didn't receive the instructions or all the wood parts with my kit. I mention this because the tail seems to be really flexible. If I hold the top of the vertical stab and hold the fuselage, I can move it side to side really easy. It would seem to benefit from some formers in the tail. Does your kit have any formers in the tail?

Herb, I didn't receive the instructions or all the wood parts with my kit. I mention this because the tail seems to be really flexible. If I hold the top of the vertical stab and hold the fuselage, I can move it side to side really easy. It would seem to benefit from some formers in the tail. Does your kit have any formers in the tail?

Mine has no formers but I will add one, or more likely, two. One halfway to the tail, and one at the very back.

The problem is not just the tail flexing a bit, but the paint chipping, cracking and popping off eventually from the floppy surface.

The thin ply formers can be made very lightweight, the problem I've had is making them precise enough so they fit well and do the job.

I've made some paper templates, but most likely I will use three overlapping parts (l,r,bott) so the fit will be good and the amount of epoxy will be minimal.

My kit did not include the fan mounting formers either, so I had to make some paper templates for those as well.

For now I am still working on the wing though, which is almost complete modulo the fans.

Mine has no formers but I will add one, or more likely, two. One halfway to the tail, and one at the very back.

The problem is not just the tail flexing a bit, but the paint chipping, cracking and popping off eventually from the floppy surface.

The thin ply formers can be made very lightweight, the problem I've had is making them precise enough so they fit well and do the job.

I've made some paper templates, but most likely I will use three overlapping parts (l,r,bott) so the fit will be good and the amount of epoxy will be minimal.

My kit did not include the fan mounting formers either, so I had to make some paper templates for those as well.

For now I am still working on the wing though, which is almost complete modulo the fans.

I made up some lite-ply formers and glued them in place with PU glue. Total weight added was 1.25 oz, well worth the added strength and stability. I went with three formers, and they really stiffened the tail.

Looking closely at the internal drawing of the Me-262, I noticed there is a diagonal former running from the fuselage bottom just behind where the tail is joined, up through the vertical stab. It's reflected in the rivet detail on the outside of the fuselage. That was the largest former. I also made two vertical formers, one right at where the tail joins, which is about a 1cm wide piece running around the inside circumference of the fuselage, and another which is located in the center of the tail along the external rivet line.

The nacelle formers were the only wood pieces I got with the kit.

I also didn't get the nacelle bottom covers, I'm planning to make those with 1/64th plywood, and glass them with .5 oz cloth if needed.

I'm going to use 9s flight packs, Stumax SM89 fans, with HET700-68 motors. It's a bit of a wait for the Stumax fans, but are well worth the cost and wait! 2.5KW a side sounds scary. I'm going to have to go easy on the throttle!

Although there's quite a bit of work involved in getting this thing ready, it is a very well engineered, strong (and very light!!) airframe.

I was able to get some work done on the nacelle mounts. They will carry quite a bit of weight and thrust, in spite of the fact that I am going for the lightest possible fan/motor setup (440g per nacelle).

The above Neu is a warranty replacement, the original 1515 had a defective stator, shorted out in my MiG-21, set the 120A controller on fire and burned part of the tail section of my MiG, including most of the tail wiring. The Het 700 that replaced it has worked fine so far in the MiG-21

Motor weight is roughly determined by required continous power under very good cooling conditions, 2500W / (7 W/g) = 360g approximately, which puts it in the 700-68 class.

Thanks to Thunder's excellent picture of the AW fan formers, I should be able to make some progress quickly in the fan installation department ...

The elevator and aileron servos are finally in and tested. The elevator servos are mounted asymmetrically to avoid the use of mixers or mixing functions in the transmitter. A single y-connector is used in the tail, as well as one for the ailerons.

These brakes are hydraulic, and require a specific type and shape of wheel inset. Not sure I will be using these particular designs; well made and lightweight but not necessarily a good fit to the Robart rims & wheels ...

.

Images

I've noticed that some hydraulic systems are starting to be offered. They will probably be easier to make work smoothly because the pressure variation will be more exact with fluid as opposed to air, but can you imagine the mess if you get a leak? Also normal brake fluid is very corossive and will remove paint. Could get ugly.

Yes in principle hydraulic brakes should be much smoother because of the incompressibility of oil (some even use water, but does not seem a such a great idea to me since it evaporates).

I thought though this was more an internet flying kind of project, but then my friend Gregg F has oil brakes in a BVM Fury and he says they work fine. If Gregg says they work, then they work ! I suppose once you put the oil in, you are done for life...

They work quite differently from the BVM and Robart Uni air (pneumatic) brakes, which make an o-ring expand against the rim. There when air pressure is released, the o-ring returns to it's previous state, hopefully unlocking the brake.

On the other hand the above oil (hydraulic) disk brakes rely on the servo activated piston to push in, and then pull back the disk away from the wheel.

Thought you might appreciate these pics I got today. Not something you usually see on the ramp at your local airport. Apparently this is the 262 that was donated to the Collings foundation and they are flying off the time required by the FAA here in Sacramento!

-hutch

Images

Three and one oil would be much more user friendly than automotive type brake fluid. That would be nice to have proportional brakes instead of the almost on/off function of the air brakes. You also have plenty of room inside the plane to be able to access the system if you ever needed to.